Not my stats. I didn’t paint anything.

The person specifically mentioned academia, and CV are most often used in academia for jobs, grants, whatever. So the person you responded to is correct.

An American résumé is a CV to the British.

Yes, there are differences between the US and European variations, and people misusing the terms and not understanding the formats has further muddied the waters, so there’s nothing to be solved by debating it here. Anyone wishing to actually adhere to specific formats can google it themselves.

Quick stats check and less than 30% of truck owners use their truck for truck things, more than 30% don’t at all, and the rest might once in a while. So 60%-ish plus basically use a truck as a daily driver and not for hauling, work, or towing.

You are in the minority.

They all enshittify. That’s how it goes in pursuit of The Bottom Line. Once you’re established and run out of room to innovate or grow in your market space, you then start squeezing employees, product quality, and customers for more money to keep the shareholders happy.

One of the most infamous examples of literally saying “Don’t Be Evil” as a company motto used by Google, they turned to shit just like all the rest.

Wait until you see what Americans think about the rest of the world. If they bother to at all.

The one in ten that actually uses a truck for truck stuff and not a mallcruiser.

And they’d have to buy parts and materials from the same suppliers feeding the major automakers who have already streamlined their logistics and costs from the smelter to the finished product - and you know they’d exploit those efficiencies and supplier connections to create financial hardship on the upstart automaker. Same way airlines use fare wars to undercut competitors to pressure them out of a market.

There’s nothing the business world hates more than a well treated and well paid workforce. They’ll band together to crush the idea.

The broken window theory certainly applies to the wealthy.

Yeah, these are obviously different. All kinds of visible differences. Pockets, color of bag, strap sizes, no string on hood, lapel looks different, one looks more like a hoodie with a jacket, the other looks like a jacket with a hood… Just doesn’t match very well at all.

“Terminal condition”

The fictional outcome that might work best - the shooter has a terminal condition, escapes punishment until their final weeks, publicly admits what and why they did it and dies before the courts can really do anything. That way there’s closure, justice is left in limbo, and the shooter doesn’t really escape either. No happy ending, it’s not a happy story.

That Kennedy quote is getting a lot of use:

”Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

Most people are sick of seeing the wealthy escape consequences, they know the wealthy are the largest benefactors of a lot of the issues we face, from climate change to health care claims being denied, they drive disparity to greater extremes, and control the media and profit from the resulting unrest.

They’re parasites. They offer nothing worthwhile.

If one views MP’s comedy of men playing women’s parts as part of traditional theater in England (historically men played all parts, including women’s roles, especially in Shakespearian times) then the act of cross-dressing is not punching down, it is a tradition that the anachronism makes humorous.

They certainly mocked gender stereotypes of the era, but even when they had characters that were gay they didn’t really attack the “gay” part, just exaggerated the character’s flamboyance for effect. Another stereotype that we still see in movies and TV today, it hasn’t stopped being humorous, we just acknowledge the stereotype vs any overriding prejudice that may have been more the norm 40-50 years ago.

I’m a pretty big fan, collected all the Flying Circus and movies, and I absolutely could be wrong about my take, it’s been a while since I watched a lot of their act. But I do remember not cringing hard at any of the gender or gay roles. For the time they were pretty kind and didn’t usually directly mock the person for being female or gay, it was just who they were in that role. Nonetheless, some of it wouldn’t work today.

This is the most correct answer. English Theater, historically, had men playing the women’s parts. There’s a long, long tradition of it. So MP dressing in drag follwed the tradition, the viewer might find it both appropriate, and humorously anachronistic, along with MP’s exaggeration of the characters makes for great humor.

Yep, and we’re surrounded by enablers, too. I left my phone at home accidentally when I went out with the fam. “Fuckit, I don’t need a phone. Let’s just go…”

And not only did it become quickly obvious how much I use my phone (NFC payment, looking up store hours, nearest grocery store, etc) but how much everyone expected me to have a phone and everything on it. Use my phone to pay. I don’t have it, I gotta use a card. Give my kid cash for when we drop her off to hang out with friends with apple pay. Can’t do it, no phone. Here’s $15 cash. (Eye roll, carrying change is a burden now) Use loyalty card at the store. Nope, it’s on the phone. Wife has to use hers. Can’t get my daughter’s text messages, and even though she knew I’d left my phone, she still texted me.

People expect you to have all the conveniences on a phone, including the ones that are convenient to them.

TBF I think Hilton was deliberate to some extent. She rode the wave of controversy she created and made a name for herself separate from the family name. She’s still controversial, but she’s independent.

Lohan was just an addict in a downward spiral chased by harsh public opinion. Unfortunately the public loves to see a star fall.

If you’re referring to CA, it’s % of the entire state. Think of how much of CA is arid, mountainous, or otherwise unsuitable for corn or other agriculture.

Is your decanter over something warm? A TV? Cable box? Radiator? Heater register?

Something that will cause the likelihood of evaporation to go up?

Do we actually vote to benefit the rich?

Many vote for leaders that openly cater to the rich, but I don’t know that we actually consciously vote to deliberately help the rich.

Those elected people are the ones telling everyone that the rich are the job creators. They used to feed us the farce that trickle-down was viable, they don’t even bother with the lie anymore. The rich are just squatters on wealth. They get that wealth by consolidating businesses, hoarding assets like real estate, creating artificial scarcity, enshittifying everything, and squeezing labor for more productivity while expending massive effort to minimize overall compensation.

And they own the media. All of it. Even the “liberal” media is mealy at best about taxing wealth or anything critical of the uber-wealthy, anything right of center is openly against tax, particularly of anyone with wealth, making the wealthy the “victims” of the left’s ideas while the wealthy are just parasites victimizing us all.

All that aside, the real crux of the issue is identity politics. Being a sycophant of the rich is no longer any different than being a evangelical supply-side Jesus CINO, pro-gun, anti-government, anti-tax, anti-environmental regs, blah blah and all the rest of the mulish conservative BS.

They don’t actually care if we cater to the rich. They care that their team says we should bend over and give the rich everything. Just like their team says school shootings are an acceptable price for having your own personal arsenal, or spreading a potentially deadly disease is better than being inconvenienced by closed restaurants.

Obstinate tribalism has gleefully supplanted critical thought.

Some inside perspective:

You are talking to staff or an intern. You might be the hundredth call for the day. They’ve heard all kinds of shit, from long-winded conspiracy crazies to the most courteous and intelligent calls ever. Yelling at them or being a jerk will get you nowhere. Be prepared to state your case clearly and concisely. Your concern will indeed be noted and logged.

Do not call a congressperson that isn’t your own. They are not required to listen to you, you are not their constituent. Do not write a congressperson that is not your own. The letter is almost guaranteed to go straight into the trash.

The best letters go on the intern break room fridge to be enjoyed by all.

Even so, unfortunately the congressperson may not act in a way consistent with the majority of people’s calls and letters. Thank money and power plays in politics for that.